[dtennent]

Originally Posted by CybrSage

11,300 of the retractions were for only two branches of science, not all of them.

If we are going to evaluate science, let's at least use the data correctly.

Let’s see. You say that 11,300 were from 2 branches is science without any reference on your part. It is not logical that we should believe you.

[justjim]

Originally Posted by huge-pigeons

So if abc/nbc/cnn/msnbc/cbs and any of the other fake news channels say the same thing, then it’s true? All these fake news outlets get together each day to come up with the “theme” or “word” of the day to bash a person. It’s funny, you can watch 10 mins of each of these outlets during the day and see what the common “theme”/“word” is and I know millions of people believe this garbage.

I’m not sure what these news media you mention as fake news have to do with this thread but they do have much to do with having a free press necessary for a democracy and protected by the First Amendment. A conspiracy theory between the networks, really.

For over 50 years I have listened/watched the evening news (6:30 ET) on different news channels (ABC, NBC, CBS). I see nothing fake about them. Sometimes I watch PBS. I believe the news is presented as accurate and fairly as possible by men and women who are there to let us know what is happening across the United States and around the World. Every effort is made to get information correct but a rare mistake is always possible. Reporters sometimes are in “harms way” as they report from dangerous places around the globe. We are a fortunate people to have a free press unlike many other authoritarian dictatorships.

That said, CNN, Fox and other cable news are biased in their reporting and opinionated in their views. Social media is definitely not the best source of accurate information. However, they too are protected by the First Amendment.

[Taltarzac725]

Originally Posted by justjim

I’m not sure what these news media you mention as fake news have to do with this thread but they do have much to do with having a free press necessary for a democracy and protected by the First Amendment. A conspiracy theory between the networks, really.

For over 50 years I have listened/watched the evening news (6:30 ET) on different news channels (ABC, NBC, CBS). I see nothing fake about them. Sometimes I watch PBS. I believe the news is presented as accurate and fairly as possible by men and women who are there to let us know what is happening across the United States and around the World. Every effort is made to get information correct but a rare mistake is always possible. Reporters sometimes are in “harms way” as they report from dangerous places around the globe. We are a fortunate people to have a free press unlike many other authoritarian dictatorships.

That said, CNN, Fox and other cable news are biased in their reporting and opinionated in their views. Social media is definitely not the best source of accurate information. However, they too are protected by the First Amendment.

Fox "News" is entertainment not news. CNN has a slight skew but does stick to the facts but does have a lot of people turn in their opinions of those facts. Often CNN has a rather dart board like guest for the other commentators to skewer.

[AMB444]

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580

Science is bunk! Bring back blood letting, leeches

I understand what your saying and don't disagree....but blood letting was actually beneficial for some health conditions. I'm just sayin'.....

[jimbomaybe]

Originally Posted by Pugchief

LOL, no. If the previous data included ALL cities, and the you take out some cities, the trend is not real. You have to compare ALL cities in the baseline year to ALL cities in the comparison year to actually see the true trend. Which they didn't do.

And to make matters worse, the police aren't responding to as many calls or making as many arrests due to pressure from above. Then prosecutors aren't filing the same degree of charges on rare occasions when they actually prosecute. All leading to more fake comparisons over given time frames.

You are right, I did not make the point I intended vary well, if you accept the FBI data as accurate and then the base data used is modified, it calls into question its reliability, I put an "IF " in there and should have expanded on that , my bad

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by AMB444

I understand what your saying and don't disagree....but blood letting was actually beneficial for some health conditions. I'm just sayin'.....

And leeches, too. But science moves forward with newer and better results, while occasionally finding new uses for old treatments. Science and scientists are (for the most part) our friends.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

Fox "News" is entertainment not news. CNN has a slight skew but does stick to the facts but does have a lot of people turn in their opinions of those facts. Often CNN has a rather dart board like guest for the other commentators to skewer.

I sometimes feel like y'all are living in an alternate reality.

Do people not know the difference between "the news" and "a news show?" We all grew up before there was cable, before social media, before the internet was available to everyone who owned a cell phone - before cell phones, before desktop computers.

Unless the majority of this forum membership is experiencing a collective dementia, you should ALL remember what "the news" means, as compared to "news shows." You should all know the difference between the two, and how to tell which is which.

So why are people referring to CNN - which is a NETWORK, as "fake news" or "slightly biased" ?

Here's a reminder:

News: A building burned down yesterday. There were 20 survivors, 1 injured and in the hospital, 1 fatality. Firefighters arrived 4 minutes after the first call to 911 reported the fire. The building was rendered uninhabitable. Details are as yet unavailable as to the cause.

News SHOW: Three Green-Pack gang members were seen one block away from the fire that broke out, and some residents are pointing fingers at them. They're saying it's a gang-related arson, and the fatality was a planned hit.

Other News SHOW: Johnny Blue, of the Blue-Pack gang, has been claiming the Green-Pack gang infiltrated his headquarters in the building, trying to plant drugs to get him arrested. But it is known that Blue has been arrested 19 times for drug related crimes and has himself been in and out of rehab since he was 12 years old.

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

I sometimes feel like y'all are living in an alternate reality.

Do people not know the difference between "the news" and "a news show?" We all grew up before there was cable, before social media, before the internet was available to everyone who owned a cell phone - before cell phones, before desktop computers.

Unless the majority of this forum membership is experiencing a collective dementia, you should ALL remember what "the news" means, as compared to "news shows." You should all know the difference between the two, and how to tell which is which.

So why are people referring to CNN - which is a NETWORK, as "fake news" or "slightly biased" ?

Here's a reminder:

News: A building burned down yesterday. There were 20 survivors, 1 injured and in the hospital, 1 fatality. Firefighters arrived 4 minutes after the first call to 911 reported the fire. The building was rendered uninhabitable. Details are as yet unavailable as to the cause.

News SHOW: Three Green-Pack gang members were seen one block away from the fire that broke out, and some residents are pointing fingers at them. They're saying it's a gang-related arson, and the fatality was a planned hit.

Other News SHOW: Johnny Blue, of the Blue-Pack gang, has been claiming the Green-Pack gang infiltrated his headquarters in the building, trying to plant drugs to get him arrested. But it is known that Blue has been arrested 19 times for drug related crimes and has himself been in and out of rehab since he was 12 years old.

Sure glad I'm not Johnny Blue! 😒

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by spd2918

When your science is politicized it is no longer valid. When your science is propped up by governments seeking new taxes it is no longer valid. When the media only reports science items favorable to the lie it is no longer exists.

And, as we see in this thread, when research papers are falsified to continue funding it is no longer valid.

So - if science teaches us that the earth is spherical, AND the Purple Political Party says that's why you need to vote for the Purple Candidate - then that science is no longer valid, and the earth ceases to be spherical?

I think maybe you're not understanding the point of science.

Science is science, whether you politicize it or not. The science only changes with new information comes in to alter the conclusions. It doesn't matter who backs the science, or who is using it for what purpose.

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

It doesn't matter who backs the science, or who is using it for what purpose.

Hans! Discover a more powerful weapon to exschplode zee Englanders! 🤯🥸 Ya, mein herring.

Doesn't matter? Not to science, maybe. But to people, in certain cases it might. 🤔

[Pugchief]

Originally Posted by fdpaq0580

A statement exaggerated to make a point is simply that, an exaggerated statement. Not "data", real or fake. And not presented as data. Jmho. 🫠

[/sarcasm]

[Pugchief]

Originally Posted by Taltarzac725

Fox "News" is entertainment not news.

Fox is the same as ABC CBS NBC CNN and especially MSNBC: Opinion bordering on propaganda.

CNN has a slight skew

LOL, hope you don't actually believe that....

[Pugchief]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

I sometimes feel like y'all are living in an alternate reality.

Do people not know the difference between "the news" and "a news show?" We all grew up before there was cable, before social media, before the internet was available to everyone who owned a cell phone - before cell phones, before desktop computers.

Unless the majority of this forum membership is experiencing a collective dementia, you should ALL remember what "the news" means, as compared to "news shows." You should all know the difference between the two, and how to tell which is which.

So why are people referring to CNN - which is a NETWORK, as "fake news" or "slightly biased" ?

Here's a reminder:

News: A building burned down yesterday. There were 20 survivors, 1 injured and in the hospital, 1 fatality. Firefighters arrived 4 minutes after the first call to 911 reported the fire. The building was rendered uninhabitable. Details are as yet unavailable as to the cause.

News SHOW: Three Green-Pack gang members were seen one block away from the fire that broke out, and some residents are pointing fingers at them. They're saying it's a gang-related arson, and the fatality was a planned hit.

Other News SHOW: Johnny Blue, of the Blue-Pack gang, has been claiming the Green-Pack gang infiltrated his headquarters in the building, trying to plant drugs to get him arrested. But it is known that Blue has been arrested 19 times for drug related crimes and has himself been in and out of rehab since he was 12 years old.

Your point is valid, but you didn't carry the opinionizing far enough in the "show" examples. The reality is way worse.

[Pugchief]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

So - if science teaches us that the earth is spherical, AND the Purple Political Party says that's why you need to vote for the Purple Candidate - then that science is no longer valid, and the earth ceases to be spherical?

I think maybe you're not understanding the point of science.

Science is science, whether you politicize it or not. The science only changes with new information comes in to alter the conclusions. It doesn't matter who backs the science, or who is using it for what purpose.

Science ceases to become science when the researchers are pressured to conclude a specific predetermined outcome, which is essentially politicization.

[fdpaq0580]

Originally Posted by Pugchief

Science ceases to become science when the researchers are pressured to conclude a specific predetermined outcome, which is essentially politicization.

The actual scientific result should be the same, but altering the facts or claiming a false result is telling an untruth. 2+2=4. True. Pressure to claim the result is other than 4 would be an untruth, dishonest, dishonorable, misrepresentation, lying, etc.
Note. There are some clever people that can through up a lot of fancy equations that erroneously show the answer to be other than 4, but they are doing mathematical 3 card monte. Like the wise man once said, "figures don't lie, but liars can figure".